Decision‐Making Fairness and Consensus Building in Multisector Community Health Alliances: A Mixed‐Methods Analysis

Abstract

Given their inherently diverse composition and potentially competing interests, a foundational activity of community health alliances is establishing consensus on the vision and strategies for achieving its goals. Using an organizational justice framework, we examined whether member perceptions of fairness in alliances' decision-making processes are associated with the perceived level of consensus among members regarding the alliance vision and strategies. We used a mixed-methods design to examine the relationship between perceptions of fairness and consensus within fourteen multisector community health alliances. Quantitative analysis found the perceived level of consensus to be positively associated with decision-making transparency (procedural fairness), inclusiveness (procedural fairness), and benefits relative to costs (distributive fairness). Qualitative analysis indicated that the consensus-building process is facilitated by using formal decision-making frameworks and engaging alliance mem-bers in decision-making processes early. Alliance leaders may be more successful at building consensus when they recognize the need to appeal to a member' s sense of procedural and distributive fairness, and, perhaps equally important, recognize when one rather than the other is called for and draw upon decision-making processes that most clearly evoke that sense of fairness. Our findings reinforce the importance of fairness in building and sustaining capacity for improving community health.

Who Determines How Nonprofits Confront Uncertainty?

“…This research attempts to demonstrate that nonprofit managers, board members, beneficiaries, donors, and government funders determine the type of strategic action nonprofits take when they confront uncertainty. Because nonprofits are charged with balancing competing financial and social preferences for these constituents (Connolly, Conlon, and Deutsch ; Dunn ; Freeman ; Hearld et al ; Mitchell, Agle, and Wood ), we apply stakeholder theory to form our predictions. Stakeholder theory suggests that nonprofit behavior is influenced by the preferences of the most salient stakeholders when salience is a function of power, legitimacy, and urgency (Freeman ).…”

Environmental Standards and Justice

“…Once again, perceptions regarding the inclusivity of participation in an environmental scheme or standard can become instrumental in how successful such initiatives end up being. Examples from the field of conservation contracting show, for instance that the legitimacy of such schemes and rate of corresponding participation depend on the way individuals are approached and how actively they become engaged in the process (Hearld et al 2013;Paloniemi and Tikka 2008;Paloniemi and Varho 2009). Individuals also seem to care about the details, i.e.…”

Locations of Decision Makers in Membership Organizations

“…Resource‐dependence theorists emphasize that an organization's needs related to attracting resources affect its decision making (Guo and Acar ; Miller‐Millesen ; Pfeffer and Salancik ). Relatedly, information asymmetries, trust dynamics, resource needs, ownership, and mission give some actors an advantage over others in pushing their participation in decision making (Campbell 2008; Conteh and Ohemeng ; Hearld et al ).…”